Fake field goal - brilliant or deceptive? No huddle offense - brilliant, or a tactic that puts the defense at an unfair advantage? Play action - deceptive maneuver or a staple of the game?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________Stop being a hypocrite

Mon Jan 26, 2015 7:42 am

Mothman

Defensive Tackle

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 amPosts: 37357Location: Chicago, IL

Re: More New England Cheating?

frosted wrote:

Fake field goal - brilliant or deceptive? No huddle offense - brilliant, or a tactic that puts the defense at an unfair advantage? Play action - deceptive maneuver or a staple of the game?

Exactly... motion, direct snap to a back, zone blitzing, corner blitzing, dropping a lineman into coverage, throwing a pass to the QB, the flea flicker, the statue of liberty play... NFL history is one long example of teams scheming to deceive each other within the rules.

Mon Jan 26, 2015 8:01 am

J. Kapp 11

Hall of Famer

Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pmPosts: 6889

Re: More New England Cheating?

The Breeze wrote:

J. Kapp 11 wrote:

And Breeze, you didn't answer my question. Did Tiger Woods cheat by moving the boulder?

He certainly gained a competitive advantage.

I'm not sure that example fits this scenario, but I don't consider that cheating as I don't imagine it would be difficult for any pro golfer to enlist the help of spectators in such a situation.

In fact I can't think of another example that fits this one exactly. What the NFL does in terms of allowing teams to furnish their own balls is kind of awkward IMO. Baseball would be the one sport where you might have a similar possibility, but umpires are constantly checking the state of the balls and eliminating any advantage a pitcher might get.

Actually, in baseball, the umpires touch every ball. They rub them up with this special mud that comes form the Chesapeake Bay. Not even kidding. But there are things that happen that seem wrong. For example, the Colorado Rockies keep their baseballs in a humidore to offset the effects of the ball going farther at high altitude. Both teams use those balls, but it still seems wack to me.

My point about Tiger Woods fits the scenario perfectly. To call a two-ton boulder a "loose impediment" seems far-fetched. Lots of people claimed Tiger was breaking the spirit of the rules, and the PGA was turning a blind eye to its cash cow. But Tiger got a ruling from the rules official, and the rest is history.

The Patriots, as far as I can tell, followed the rules as they are written. They got a ruling, so to speak, by turning in the footballs to the officials. And even if they knew the balls would deflate in the cold, the rule doesn't cover that ... just as the rules of golf don't cover the fact that no normal person would have the advantage of having 10 strong men move the boulder (yes, other tour pros might have those guys, but how about guys on the Web.com tour ... or weekend amateurs).

Tiger Woods took advantage of a rule as written. So did the Patriots. It may seem distasteful, but it's the truth. To me, the legal-illegal substitution rule is more distasteful ... but still legal. How do we correct loopholes in the real-world law? We change the laws. Like I said, I don't think there's one of you who wouldn't take advantage of a legal tax loophole if it would save you money. This is what the Patriots are doing.

_________________Go ahead. I dare you.Underestimate this man.

Mon Jan 26, 2015 9:50 am

J. Kapp 11

Hall of Famer

Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pmPosts: 6889

Re: More New England Cheating?

One other thing.

Back in the '70s, the Oakland Raiders were renowned for using stickum, a tar-like substance that WRs and DBs put on their hands to help them catch the football. Lester Hayes, a cornerback, was said to smear it over his entire uniform. Everybody used it, but the Raiders took it to the extreme.

The NFL decided this shouldn't be happening, so guess what they did? They changed the rule.

That's what will likely happen here.

Or not.

Maybe the NFL will once again take the side of the quarterback. And more scoring. More otherwise uninterested fans taking an interest in the NFL through the juggernaut that is fantasy football. Maybe they love us arguing about it because it keeps the NFL front and center, putting even more eyes in front of the Super Bowl ads this Sunday.

_________________Go ahead. I dare you.Underestimate this man.

Mon Jan 26, 2015 10:09 am

The Breeze

Hall of Fame Inductee

Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:14 pmPosts: 4016Location: So. Utah

Re: More New England Cheating?

J. Kapp 11 wrote:

Actually, in baseball, the umpires touch every ball. They rub them up with this special mud that comes form the Chesapeake Bay. Not even kidding. But there are things that happen that seem wrong. For example, the Colorado Rockies keep their baseballs in a humidore to offset the effects of the ball going farther at high altitude. Both teams use those balls, but it still seems wack to me.

My point about Tiger Woods fits the scenario perfectly. To call a two-ton boulder a "loose impediment" seems far-fetched. Lots of people claimed Tiger was breaking the spirit of the rules, and the PGA was turning a blind eye to its cash cow. But Tiger got a ruling from the rules official, and the rest is history.

The Patriots, as far as I can tell, followed the rules as they are written. They got a ruling, so to speak, by turning in the footballs to the officials. And even if they knew the balls would deflate in the cold, the rule doesn't cover that ... just as the rules of golf don't cover the fact that no normal person would have the advantage of having 10 strong men move the boulder (yes, other tour pros might have those guys, but how about guys on the Web.com tour ... or weekend amateurs).

Tiger Woods took advantage of a rule as written. So did the Patriots. It may seem distasteful, but it's the truth. To me, the legal-illegal substitution rule is more distasteful ... but still legal. How do we correct loopholes in the real-world law? We change the laws. Like I said, I don't think there's one of you who wouldn't take advantage of a legal tax loophole if it would save you money. This is what the Patriots are doing.

Because both teams use the same ball in baseball what the umpire does to the balls is moot, the Rockies refrigerating balls equally effects both teams. The only way a team has an advantage through the ball is if someone, especially the pitcher doctors it, which the ump is constantly watching for.

I disagree about the Tiger situation being a perfect example because again he didn't preemptively organize a group of people to clear paths for him than no other player could use. I would think if a Bubba Watson or Ernie Els found themselves in a similar situation people from the gallery would help them. If Tiger had a couple of specially doctored balls in his bag that he snuck into play then removed later to hide then we have a better analogy.

I had considered the Tax analogy but it's different because the issue is between to entities competing for a prize. Still most people wouldn't begrudge the guy saving a few hundred on taxes whereas they might get upset with the billionaire saving a $10million in an offshore account.

But Let me back up a point out what my orginal comment about 'intention' indicates.....here is the piece of your quote that find I damming IF TRUE:

J. Kapp 11 wrote:

So ... let's say that Tom Brady understands the ideal gas law. That's not far fetched. After all, we all understand it intuitively when we inflate our tires, and Brady is a 15-year veteran who knows his craft. And let's say that Brady KNOWS if he has the equipment manager inflate the balls to exactly 12.5 psi at 75 degrees, they'll end up at 10.6 psi once they've equalized with the outside temperature.

Even if he knew all that AND did it intentionally to gain a competitive advantage ...

First let me add that it would be an unfair competitive advantage because there is a rule in place in hopes of preventing that. The stickum advantage was not unfair because everyone could do it as there was yet to be a rule.

Now here is Belichek's quote:

Quote:

"At no time was there any intent whatsoever to try to compromise the integrity of the game or to gain an advantage," he said.

If what you suggested happened did happen, and I'm not saying it did, then someone has made a liar out of their head coach and has further cast the team in suspicion. Deservedly so.. if true.

Whether or not it's provable, punishable or if other people would do it is moot to me. The point is the premeditated intention to get around a rule created for the implicit purpose of having a level playing field by finding a loophole in the way the rule is enforced.

The Pats don't need to be caught and punished for people to believe that they have diminished the integrity of the game, in terms of their legacy, in the court of public opinion. It's already happening and BB is well aware, evidently. It's just a matter of whether or not they care. Inflate me to the pressure of being dubious....

Player A takes steroids and cheats on his drug test and gets away with it...while player B unknowingly has a sports drink that triggers a positive result and gets suspended. The first guy intended to cheat and got away with it....a lot of people seem ok with that. It doesn't count if you don't get caught...even NFL coaches.

Adrian Peterson did everything the rules called for regarding his infraction and punishment, yet Goodell in his infinite wisdom is judging AD's intent and finding him still guilty. I seriously doubt he will have the stones or support to do that to the Patriots...not in his best interest regardless of what's good for the game.

You get the last word on this cause I have to pack and hit the road for awhile. I've enjoyed the volley.

See ya'll after the draft

Mon Jan 26, 2015 11:38 am

Mothman

Defensive Tackle

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 amPosts: 37357Location: Chicago, IL

Re: More New England Cheating?

My goodness... there's now an entirely different level to "deflategate":

_________________"Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth." - Mike Tyson

Mon Jan 26, 2015 11:48 am

Raptorman

Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:23 pmPosts: 3189Location: Sebastian, FL

Re: More New England Cheating?

Something to think about. If the Patriots have been deflating balls since 2007 one would think that it would show up in Brady's passing. So I went back and looked at his numbers. Now, I am not saying his number are better because of the deflated balls because the Patriots did happen to have a change in WR's in 2007. But look at the numbers and draw your own conclusions. Did the WR's make that much difference?

Again, the Patriots got Welker and Moss in 2007 so that may account for some of this. But does it account for all if it? I don't know. Rodgers has a high TD percentage. But Rodgers has never had the increase in TD percentage and decrease in Interception percentage that Brady had. And these two numbers just happen to have happened for Brady starting in 2007. Brady's int % the first 6 years. 2.9 2.3 2.3 3.0 2.6 2.3 And starting in 2007 1.4 2.3 0.8 2.0 1.3 1.8 1.5. BTW, 2007 is the first year that the teams were allowed to use their own balls for home and away games. A rule that Brady helped bring about. He just instantly got better with new WR's.

Somehow, after the past year, it would seem appropriate if Roger Goodell and the NFL ended up in a more embarrassing position over this controversy than the Patriots themselves.

Holy crap...the plot thickens I had a feeling something was up after watching Belichek's presser. It almost felt like somebody was Belichecking him.

If the league has done this and given them enough rope to hang themselves, it's exactly the type of deception the Pats use. It would feel like just desserts...maybe....but I'm not sure how I feel about the league doing that. I guess if someone is constantly pushing the integrity envelope it creates a more severe reaction.

Yeah, I'm heading out to the high desert for a few months to be reclusive and reflective . I might be able to lurk on my phone but I won't be able to hold a quality conversation with anyone.

Enjoy the superbowl, Jim

Mon Jan 26, 2015 12:17 pm

Cliff

Site Admin

Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:51 pmPosts: 8232Location: Kentucky

Re: More New England Cheating?

Mothman wrote:

My goodness... there's now an entirely different level to "deflategate":

Somehow, after the past year, it would seem appropriate if Roger Goodell and the NFL ended up in a more embarrassing position over this controversy than the Patriots themselves.

I thought this tweet was interesting;

Quote:

When told of suspected cheating by #Pats, #NFL tried to catch them in act rather than reminding them of rules. Is something wrong with that?

That seems like a bizarre take.

So rather than drug testing players, perhaps they'll just remind them of the no PED rules if they suspect them of using?

It's a new day for catching people who break the rules/laws. Cops won't try to catch a thief with stolen property (You know, the proof ... ), instead they'll send them a letter telling them that stealing is against the law.

Anyway, it doesn't matter anymore. The Superbowl lineup isn't changing. Most of the fans don't seem to really care very much. Most of the players don't seem to care very much. The NFL apparently didn't care very much before now (or they'd actually provide the balls).

Still feels sleazy though. 'I always keep a few cards up my sleeves when I play poker, but I didn't need to use them in the hand where I took all your money, so don't sweat it'.

_________________"Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth." - Mike Tyson

Mon Jan 26, 2015 12:19 pm

Mothman

Defensive Tackle

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 amPosts: 37357Location: Chicago, IL

Re: More New England Cheating?

The Breeze wrote:

Mothman wrote:

My goodness... there's now an entirely different level to "deflategate":

Somehow, after the past year, it would seem appropriate if Roger Goodell and the NFL ended up in a more embarrassing position over this controversy than the Patriots themselves.

Holy crap...the plot thickens I had a feeling something was up after watching Belichek's presser. It almost felt like somebody was Belichecking him.

If the league has done this and given them enough rope to hang themselves, it's exactly the type of deception the Pats use. It would feel like just desserts...maybe....but I'm not sure how I feel about the league doing that. I guess if someone is constantly pushing the integrity envelope it creates a more severe reaction.

Perhaps but if, as many are contending, the under-inflated balls make a genuine difference in performance then as that article points out, it would be somewhat mind-boggling if it turned out the NFL essentially, knowingly, allowed NE to use under-inflated footballs for the first half of a championship game before engaging in a halftime "sting".

Quote:

Yeah, I'm heading out to the high desert for a few months to be reclusive and reflective . I might be able to lurk on my phone but I won't be able to hold a quality conversation with anyone.

You live an interesting life, my friend!

Quote:

Enjoy the superbowl, Jim

Thanks. Enjoy your trip. I hope it's rewarding.

Mon Jan 26, 2015 12:39 pm

Mothman

Defensive Tackle

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 amPosts: 37357Location: Chicago, IL

Re: More New England Cheating?

Cliff wrote:

Mothman wrote:

My goodness... there's now an entirely different level to "deflategate":

Somehow, after the past year, it would seem appropriate if Roger Goodell and the NFL ended up in a more embarrassing position over this controversy than the Patriots themselves.

I thought this tweet was interesting;

Quote:

When told of suspected cheating by #Pats, #NFL tried to catch them in act rather than reminding them of rules. Is something wrong with that?

That seems like a bizarre take.

So rather than drug testing players, perhaps they'll just remind them of the no PED rules if they suspect them of using?

It's a new day for catching people who break the rules/laws. Cops won't try to catch a thief with stolen property (You know, the proof ... ), instead they'll send them a letter telling them that stealing is against the law.

Anyway, it doesn't matter anymore. The Superbowl lineup isn't changing. Most of the fans don't seem to really care very much. Most of the players don't seem to care very much. The NFL apparently didn't care very much before now (or they'd actually provide the balls).

Still feels sleazy though. 'I always keep a few cards up my sleeves when I play poker, but I didn't need to use them in the hand where I took all your money, so don't sweat it'.

I don't know what to think anymore. If it was done intentionally, which seems probable, I agree it's pretty underhanded. However, if the NFL knew about this weeks earlier and wanted to catch NE in the act then it seems more than a little strange that they didn't do it until halftime of the game that determines who represents the AFC in the Super Bowl.

Mon Jan 26, 2015 12:44 pm

Mothman

Defensive Tackle

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 amPosts: 37357Location: Chicago, IL

Re: More New England Cheating?

Raptorman wrote:

Something to think about. If the Patriots have been deflating balls since 2007 one would think that it would show up in Brady's passing. So I went back and looked at his numbers. Now, I am not saying his number are better because of the deflated balls because the Patriots did happen to have a change in WR's in 2007. But look at the numbers and draw your own conclusions. Did the WR's make that much difference?

Again, the Patriots got Welker and Moss in 2007 so that may account for some of this. But does it account for all if it? I don't know. Rodgers has a high TD percentage. But Rodgers has never had the increase in TD percentage and decrease in Interception percentage that Brady had. And these two numbers just happen to have happened for Brady starting in 2007. Brady's int % the first 6 years. 2.9 2.3 2.3 3.0 2.6 2.3 And starting in 2007 1.4 2.3 0.8 2.0 1.3 1.8 1.5. BTW, 2007 is the first year that the teams were allowed to use their own balls for home and away games. A rule that Brady helped bring about. He just instantly got better with new WR's.

Well, Welker and Moss were a BIG step up from what he had and there's always the possibility that Brady was maturing as a player. His INT percentage went back to 2.3 in 2009, his next healthy season.

That was the team's second season in Josh McDaniels' offense. Did that make a difference as they gained a better handle on it along with the additional receiving personnel? It's also possible that the improvement reflects the rule change allowing teams to provide their own footballs but doesn't indicate an increase due to using under-inflated footballs (after all, we don't know if that became a common practice for the Patriots and, if so, when it began). Prior to 2007, the home team provided footballs for both teams. Did any other QBs show a similar improvement in their numbers after that rule change?

It looks like the NFL made illegal contact and defensive holding increased points of emphasis beginning in 2007 so that's another potential factor:

Quote:

Illegal contact and defensive holding will continue to be strictly enforced. After five yards, if a receiver attempts toevade a defender, the defender cannot make contact that impedes the receiver in any way, as long as the quarterback isin the pocket with the football. Grabbing the jersey or any other part of a receiverâs uniform is a foul for defensive holdingand will be called. The only time defensive holding will not be called is if the ball is already in the air to another receiver.When an official sees illegal contact, he will look to the quarterback. If the quarterback is out of the pocket or if the ball isalready in the air to another receiver, illegal contact will not be called.

Regarding INT %: while under-inflating a football might make it easier to grip, the reduced mass also changes the way it travels through the air and makes it a little harder to throw deep with accuracy, an area in which the Patriots improved once Moss joined the team.

It seems to me there are far too many variables to draw conclusions from those numbers. but it's still an interesting question.

Mon Jan 26, 2015 1:12 pm

Mothman

Defensive Tackle

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 amPosts: 37357Location: Chicago, IL

Re: More New England Cheating?

By the way, it's wild how specific the NFL rules are regarding the ball:

The Ball must be a “Wilson,” hand selected, bearing the signature of the Commissioner of the League, Roger Goodell.The ball shall be made up of an inflated (12 1/2 to 13 1/2 pounds) urethane bladder enclosed in a pebble grained, leather case(natural tan color) without corrugations of any kind. It shall have the form of a prolate spheroid and the size and weightshall be: long axis, 11 to 11 1/4 inches; long circumference, 28 to 28 1/2 inches; short circumference, 21 to 21 1/4 inches;weight, 14 to 15 ounces.

The Referee shall be the sole judge as to whether all balls offered for play comply with these specifications. A pump is to befurnished by the home club, and the balls shall remain under the supervision of the Referee until they are delivered to theball attendant just prior to the start of the game.

Section 2BALL SUPPLYEach team will make 12 primary balls available for testing by the Referee two hours and 15 minutes prior to the starting time ofthe game to meet League requirements. The home team will also make 12 backup balls available for testing in allstadiums. In addition, the visitors, at their discretion, may bring 12 backup balls to be tested by the Referee for gamesheld in outdoor stadiums. For all games, eight new footballs, sealed in a special box and shipped by the manufacturer tothe Referee, will be opened in the officials’ locker room two hours and 15 minutes prior to the starting time of the game.These balls are to be specially marked by the Referee and used exclusively for the kicking game.

In the event a home team ball does not conform to specifications, or its supply is exhausted, the Referee shall secure a properball from the visitors and, failing that, use the best available ball. Any such circumstances must be reported to theCommissioner.

In case of rain or a wet, muddy, or slippery field, a playable ball shall be used at the request of the offensive team’s center.The Game Clock shall not stop for such action (unless undue delay occurs).

Note: It is the responsibility of the home team to furnish playable balls at all times by attendants from either side of the playingfield.

Mon Jan 26, 2015 1:15 pm

Cliff

Site Admin

Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:51 pmPosts: 8232Location: Kentucky

Re: More New England Cheating?

Mothman wrote:

I don't know what to think anymore. If it was done intentionally, which seems probable, I agree it's pretty underhanded. However, if the NFL knew about this weeks earlier and wanted to catch NE in the act then it seems more than a little strange that they didn't do it until halftime of the game that determines who represents the AFC in the Super Bowl.

It's my understanding the league was informed by the Ravens after the game the week before so the AFC Championship game would be the first chance to actually test if that's the case. I don't know how else you'd catch them than in the act though. If New England was deflating the balls (or finding a way to sneak in different balls) you might not know before the game. Perhaps they deflate the balls or change them out after the game has already started?

Either way, I still doubt much comes of this.

_________________"Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth." - Mike Tyson

Mon Jan 26, 2015 1:39 pm

J. Kapp 11

Hall of Famer

Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pmPosts: 6889

Re: More New England Cheating?

Cliff wrote:

Mothman wrote:

I don't know what to think anymore. If it was done intentionally, which seems probable, I agree it's pretty underhanded. However, if the NFL knew about this weeks earlier and wanted to catch NE in the act then it seems more than a little strange that they didn't do it until halftime of the game that determines who represents the AFC in the Super Bowl.

It's my understanding the league was informed by the Ravens after the game the week before so the AFC Championship game would be the first chance to actually test if that's the case. I don't know how else you'd catch them than in the act though. If New England was deflating the balls (or finding a way to sneak in different balls) you might not know before the game. Perhaps they deflate the balls or change them out after the game has already started?

Either way, I still doubt much comes of this.

Totally agree with you, Cliff.

And here's what gets me. If the NFL was trying to catch the Patriots in the act, then this may have been the most inept sting operation in the history of man.

Conspiracy theorists might even say it's the NFL's way of drumming up news where there is none.

_________________Go ahead. I dare you.Underestimate this man.

Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:20 pm

Mothman

Defensive Tackle

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 amPosts: 37357Location: Chicago, IL

Re: More New England Cheating?

Cliff wrote:

It's my understanding the league was informed by the Ravens after the game the week before so the AFC Championship game would be the first chance to actually test if that's the case.

That Yahoo piece I posted to above implied that teams complained about the Patriots using under-inflated footballs during the regular season, hence my comment above.

Quote:

I don't know how else you'd catch them than in the act though. If New England was deflating the balls (or finding a way to sneak in different balls) you might not know before the game. Perhaps they deflate the balls or change them out after the game has already started?

Perhaps... that's another possibility, although that makes me wonder how many other teams might do the same thing or modify the balls in some other way. I don't know how that could be prevented during the game unless the balls were monitored or simply controlled by the league and never allowed in the possession of the teams.

It seems to me the logical time to check the footballs for the championship game would have been immediately before the game rather than at halftime. That way, if the balls were under-inflated, that could have been rectified before the opening kickoff instead of after half of the game had been played.

Quote:

Either way, I still doubt much comes of this.

I doubt it too, although I suppose that depends on what the league's investigation uncovers. If they find compelling evidence of wrongdoing, they might hit the Patriots hard. I get the impression that's what some of the other owners and coaches around the league want to see happen.

Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:26 pm

Mothman

Defensive Tackle

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 amPosts: 37357Location: Chicago, IL

Re: More New England Cheating?

J. Kapp 11 wrote:

Conspiracy theorists might even say it's the NFL's way of drumming up news where there is none.

Indeed. As I said earlier in the thread, this story was basically a godsend for the media during the first of two weeks before the Super Bowl and I won't be surprised, in the wake of this wacky controversy, if this year's Super Bowl sets a ratings record (or at least approaches one).

Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:28 pm

Cliff

Site Admin

Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:51 pmPosts: 8232Location: Kentucky

Re: More New England Cheating?

Mothman wrote:

J. Kapp 11 wrote:

Conspiracy theorists might even say it's the NFL's way of drumming up news where there is none.

Indeed. As I said earlier in the thread, this story was basically a godsend for the media during the first of two weeks before the Super Bowl and I won't be surprised, in the wake of this wacky controversy, if this year's Super Bowl sets a ratings record (or at least approaches one).

I thought along the same lines. It also gets the attention away from the other issues facing the NFL (handling of Rice and Peterson, ongoing brain damage claims, etc).

If they intended for this to be such a big deal they're walking a very fine line. All of this makes me not even want to watch the Super Bowl. I wonder how many others feel the same way.

_________________"Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth." - Mike Tyson

Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:35 pm

J. Kapp 11

Hall of Famer

Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pmPosts: 6889

Re: More New England Cheating?

Cliff wrote:

Mothman wrote:

J. Kapp 11 wrote:

Conspiracy theorists might even say it's the NFL's way of drumming up news where there is none.

Indeed. As I said earlier in the thread, this story was basically a godsend for the media during the first of two weeks before the Super Bowl and I won't be surprised, in the wake of this wacky controversy, if this year's Super Bowl sets a ratings record (or at least approaches one).

I thought along the same lines. It also gets the attention away from the other issues facing the NFL (handling of Rice and Peterson, ongoing brain damage claims, etc).

If they intended for this to be such a big deal they're walking a very fine line. All of this makes me not even want to watch the Super Bowl. I wonder how many others feel the same way.

Right here. Not much interest, to be honest. Richard Sherman's mouth vs. Bill Belichick's dismissiveness to all who are not him? No thanks.

I mentioned this in an earlier post, but it seems that this story is very attractive to fringe fans. People like my daughter-in-law (whom I LOVE, by the way), who asked during her first week in a fantasy football league, "Is Aaron Rodgers a good player?" Fantasy football has attracted a lot of people who really don't care about football, but who love winning money (or at least competing for the chance to win money). A story like Deflategate could be like catnip to them.

And it's lucrative for the NFL to attract casual fans. More casual fans = more eyeballs on the TV this Sunday. More eyeballs on the TV = more future ad revenue. I mean, maybe this is as simple as, "Look Madison Avenue, we can drum up plenty of interest from women who typically spend their Sundays shopping for purses."

FOX's Jay Glazer reports the NFL has identified a Patriots locker room attendant as a "strong person of interest" in the ball-deflation scandal.

The league finally has its Ollie North. Per Glazer, the attendant "allegedly took balls from the officials' locker room to another area on way to the field." There is reportedly video of the incident. Glazer says the league is "still gauging if any wrong doing occurred." It's been obvious from Day 1 the Pats were going to set up some sort of underling as the fall guy, the only question is if he'll sing. The entire "scandal" is long past played out. It would be a shame were it to dominate all pre-SB chatter.Source: Jay Glazer on Twitter

_________________“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly

Something to think about. If the Patriots have been deflating balls since 2007 one would think that it would show up in Brady's passing. So I went back and looked at his numbers. Now, I am not saying his number are better because of the deflated balls because the Patriots did happen to have a change in WR's in 2007. But look at the numbers and draw your own conclusions. Did the WR's make that much difference?

Again, the Patriots got Welker and Moss in 2007 so that may account for some of this. But does it account for all if it? I don't know. Rodgers has a high TD percentage. But Rodgers has never had the increase in TD percentage and decrease in Interception percentage that Brady had. And these two numbers just happen to have happened for Brady starting in 2007. Brady's int % the first 6 years. 2.9 2.3 2.3 3.0 2.6 2.3 And starting in 2007 1.4 2.3 0.8 2.0 1.3 1.8 1.5. BTW, 2007 is the first year that the teams were allowed to use their own balls for home and away games. A rule that Brady helped bring about. He just instantly got better with new WR's.

Well, even if this data is not all that compelling-- there was a link to an article earlier i the thread, or perhaps in another that did some pretty decent math on the statistical likelihood that the Patriots could be an entire standard deviation below the norm of anyone else in fumbles per game from 2007-present while prior they were not. When I read that article I was unaware that Manning and Brady had lobbied for teams to supply their own balls for the games in 2006 so now that date seems a bit more significant.

Lots of circumstantial evidence.

However, unless Tom or his center or running back is sticking a needle in the valve for a second, it seems hard to believe the onus for the problem is not with the refs who fail to check compliance. Still, the math in that article has me pretty suspicious.

_________________Craig S

Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:16 pm

Raptorman

Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:23 pmPosts: 3189Location: Sebastian, FL

Re: More New England Cheating?

dead_poet wrote:

FOX's Jay Glazer reports the NFL has identified a Patriots locker room attendant as a "strong person of interest" in the ball-deflation scandal.

The league finally has its Ollie North. Per Glazer, the attendant "allegedly took balls from the officials' locker room to another area on way to the field." There is reportedly video of the incident. Glazer says the league is "still gauging if any wrong doing occurred." It's been obvious from Day 1 the Pats were going to set up some sort of underling as the fall guy, the only question is if he'll sing. The entire "scandal" is long past played out. It would be a shame were it to dominate all pre-SB chatter.Source: Jay Glazer on Twitter

And we have our fall guy. The one that will be left out to dry by the Patriots. Bill and Tom will claim not to even know him.

Something to think about. If the Patriots have been deflating balls since 2007 one would think that it would show up in Brady's passing. So I went back and looked at his numbers. Now, I am not saying his number are better because of the deflated balls because the Patriots did happen to have a change in WR's in 2007. But look at the numbers and draw your own conclusions. Did the WR's make that much difference?

Again, the Patriots got Welker and Moss in 2007 so that may account for some of this. But does it account for all if it? I don't know. Rodgers has a high TD percentage. But Rodgers has never had the increase in TD percentage and decrease in Interception percentage that Brady had. And these two numbers just happen to have happened for Brady starting in 2007. Brady's int % the first 6 years. 2.9 2.3 2.3 3.0 2.6 2.3 And starting in 2007 1.4 2.3 0.8 2.0 1.3 1.8 1.5. BTW, 2007 is the first year that the teams were allowed to use their own balls for home and away games. A rule that Brady helped bring about. He just instantly got better with new WR's.

Well, even if this data is not all that compelling-- there was a link to an article earlier i the thread, or perhaps in another that did some pretty decent math on the statistical likelihood that the Patriots could be an entire standard deviation below the norm of anyone else in fumbles per game from 2007-present while prior they were not. When I read that article I was unaware that Manning and Brady had lobbied for teams to supply their own balls for the games in 2006 so now that date seems a bit more significant.

Lots of circumstantial evidence.

I don't see that much and I don't find most of it very convincing but I understand why YMMV. If I recall correctly even in the article about fumbles, they pointed out that there were other possible explanations and that the statistical evidence was far from conclusive.

Quote:

However, unless Tom or his center or running back is sticking a needle in the valve for a second, it seems hard to believe the onus for the problem is not with the refs who fail to check compliance. Still, the math in that article has me pretty suspicious.

Well, there's obviously some reason to be suspicious but it's pretty hard to believe they've been doing this for 7 years and nobody noticed or called them out on it until now.

Mon Jan 26, 2015 5:39 pm

Mothman

Defensive Tackle

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 amPosts: 37357Location: Chicago, IL

Re: More New England Cheating?

I love that chipmunk.

Mon Jan 26, 2015 5:45 pm

Raptorman

Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:23 pmPosts: 3189Location: Sebastian, FL

Re: More New England Cheating?

cstelter wrote:

Raptorman wrote:

Something to think about. If the Patriots have been deflating balls since 2007 one would think that it would show up in Brady's passing. So I went back and looked at his numbers. Now, I am not saying his number are better because of the deflated balls because the Patriots did happen to have a change in WR's in 2007. But look at the numbers and draw your own conclusions. Did the WR's make that much difference?

Again, the Patriots got Welker and Moss in 2007 so that may account for some of this. But does it account for all if it? I don't know. Rodgers has a high TD percentage. But Rodgers has never had the increase in TD percentage and decrease in Interception percentage that Brady had. And these two numbers just happen to have happened for Brady starting in 2007. Brady's int % the first 6 years. 2.9 2.3 2.3 3.0 2.6 2.3 And starting in 2007 1.4 2.3 0.8 2.0 1.3 1.8 1.5. BTW, 2007 is the first year that the teams were allowed to use their own balls for home and away games. A rule that Brady helped bring about. He just instantly got better with new WR's.

Well, even if this data is not all that compelling-- there was a link to an article earlier i the thread, or perhaps in another that did some pretty decent math on the statistical likelihood that the Patriots could be an entire standard deviation below the norm of anyone else in fumbles per game from 2007-present while prior they were not. When I read that article I was unaware that Manning and Brady had lobbied for teams to supply their own balls for the games in 2006 so now that date seems a bit more significant.

Lots of circumstantial evidence.

However, unless Tom or his center or running back is sticking a needle in the valve for a second, it seems hard to believe the onus for the problem is not with the refs who fail to check compliance. Still, the math in that article has me pretty suspicious.

FWIW, the other QB that lobbied for the teams to use their own balls, Peyton Manning, well, his number didn't change. At least not until he went to Denver were they made the jump.

The Patriots, as far as I can tell, followed the rules as they are written. They got a ruling, so to speak, by turning in the footballs to the officials. And even if they knew the balls would deflate in the cold, the rule doesn't cover that

I've read a couple of sources now that are saying that even if the balls had been inflated in a sauna and brought outside into zero degree temps they could not have deflated to the degree observed in the balls used by the Patriots. It's a nice theory, but it's very testable and so far it's not holding air. The change in temp would have had to be far larger than possible under the circumstances of that game to result in the loss of pressure observed.

If that is true, then the "Who, me?" explanation falls apart, doesn't it? if the above is true, would you agree that the Patriots must have intentionally deflated the balls used by their offense?

I guess what I'm driving at is where is the line for those defending the Patriots here? If it is proven that PV=nRT doesn't explain what was observed, is that enough to indict Belichek and his team for cheating?

Mon Jan 26, 2015 10:04 pm

Mothman

Defensive Tackle

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 amPosts: 37357Location: Chicago, IL

Re: More New England Cheating?

VikingLord wrote:

J. Kapp 11 wrote:

The Patriots, as far as I can tell, followed the rules as they are written. They got a ruling, so to speak, by turning in the footballs to the officials. And even if they knew the balls would deflate in the cold, the rule doesn't cover that

I've read a couple of sources now that are saying that even if the balls had been inflated in a sauna and brought outside into zero degree temps they could not have deflated to the degree observed in the balls used by the Patriots. It's a nice theory, but it's very testable and so far it's not holding air. The change in temp would have had to be far larger than possible under the circumstances of that game to result in the loss of pressure observed.

At this point, it seems to be a matter of who and what we want to believe. For example:

Science is not universally standing behind Nye, however. The boffins at HeadSmart Labs, who develop testing devices to aid in reducing sports concussions, did their own experiment.

They tested a temperature difference of 75 degrees and the game time on the field 51 degrees. They also wet the 12 brand new footballs to simulate real game time conditions on the day in question.

The moisture, these scientists argue, would increase the volume of the ball and decrease the pressure.

I have no reason to believe these are a covert group of Patriots obsessives. They are students and professors at Carnegie Mellon University, so they might know their science.

They discovered that merely the drop in temperature and the wetness of the balls reduced the pressure by an average of 1.8 psi. The maximum they saw was a drop of 1.95 psi.

So, someone tested it and concluded that weather and field conditions alone could have accounted for a nearly 2 psi drop.

Quote:

I guess what I'm driving at is where is the line for those defending the Patriots here? If it is proven that PV=nRT doesn't explain what was observed, is that enough to indict Belichek and his team for cheating?

Some evidence or testimony clearly implicating them would be nice, as would greater transparency. What was the psi of the Colts footballs at halftime? What were the psi numbers for the footballs of both teams when tested before the game? To outward appearances, it certainly looks like the Patriots cheated and maybe they did but we don't even have some of the basic information that would allow us to make a determination. We know the balls were under-inflated at halftime. We don't yet know how they got that way or who was responsible.